In­dian ID – the re­sponse.

Old Bike Australasia - - LETTERS TO THE EDITOR -

Thanks for the tu­ition Lars Glerup (see OBA 67 let­ters “In­dian ID”). The cart of as­ser­tion ...ap­pears to be, well be­fore the in­tended horse of fact. The cap­tions ‘In­dian 29 Scout’, are in fact cor­rect and are in­deed the writer’s in­tent. How­ever, I have omit­ted, dur­ing a process of transcription, to con­vey a ‘ques­tion mark’ and at­tach it to the In­dian ‘29 Scout cap­tions. They ap­pear in my draft copy, pen to pa­per scrib­blings, but not in text. My apolo­gies for this in­ad­ver­tent over­sight.

The ‘29 In­dian Scout is the pre­cur­sor, to the ac­qui­si­tion of the bike pic­tured. More­over, the ar­ti­cle’s pri­mary in­tent, is to her­ald the un­likely odds of a sep­a­rately rare ac­qui­si­tion, and how it came about ...which ul­ti­mately, the failed ‘29 Scout ne­go­ti­a­tion led to. The ar­ti­cle is not, an In­dian ‘make and model’ purist’s ac­count, nor was it in­tended to be a ‘num­bers man’ ap­proach.

How­ever, if the writer’s sole in­tent was to pur­port the dif­fer­ences be­tween a ‘29 and ‘31 Scout, he would strongly em­pha­sise the fol­low­ing... A. The most prom­i­nent ‘31 dif­fer­ence, com­pared to a ‘29 is, the rear wheel de­tach­ment, via a rear hinged guard, whilst on the rear stand. B. Cross bar han­dle­bar was adopted for all mod­els of In­dian Mo­tor­cy­cles in 1931, and was most def­i­nitely ...’not only for the ‘31 scout’. C. The ‘31 scout boasted, new heav­ier gauge spokes

and nip­ples with cad­mium plat­ing and; D. a new horn of the high fre­quency vi­bra­tor type, with ex­clu­sive In­dian head de­sign front, cre­ated for In­dian, by Harry Dunn, the ac­claimed pe­riod artist, who ear­lier, painted many bat­tle scenes in France and; E. a new foot ac­ti­vated ‘town and coun­try’ larger ex­haust de­sign, also on 74 mod­els (tail fin and cut out). F. A cen­tre mounted head­lamp al­low­ing for eas­ier and more ac­cu­rate aim­ing of the head­lamp range, by means of a faster ‘sin­gle nut’ loos­en­ing process. G. A new Auto Light Elec­tric Com­pany Gen­er­a­tor,

be­ing more durable with greater out­put. H. New tank trans­fer I. Where Nickle plat­ing was found on the ‘29 plat­ing was found on the 1931 scout. J. There were also dif­fer­ences found in ‘31 scout

re­lated wir­ing. K. Of course, crank­case vent­ing had also changed, and re­lo­cated to the r/h side, top por­tion, of the tim­ing cover. Again, to re­it­er­ate, the writer’s in­tent was in­deed to ad­vo­cate the ‘con­tex­tual’ im­por­tance of the ‘In­dian ‘29 project and what en­sued from its failed ne­go­ti­a­tion, and how this fa­cil­i­tated the pro­cure­ment of a rare piece of his­tory. More­over, as the ar­ti­cle in­fers, the ‘29 In­dian project and the bike pic­tured, are not the same bikes. The ‘29 In­dian project did not be­come the bike you see pic­tured. Per­haps an en­su­ing ‘?’ af­ter the ‘ti­tle’ may have been in or­der, but that too, may well of cre­ated ‘struc­tural am­bi­gu­ity’ and feisty de­bate. Thank you Lars for your vi­brant ap­praisal. Danny Marks Via email

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.